Matt Metzgar

Squats & Deadlifts

I wrote last year about the potential problems with heavy squats.  After thinking about things more and doing some reading, I see even more drawbacks from doing weighted squats.

In this article(pdf), Gray Cook talks about the squat and the deadlift.  He concludes by saying that a person should "maintain the squat and train the deadlift".  In other words, a person should work on maintaining the mobility necessary to do an unweighted squat movement.  For lifting weights, a person should focus on the deadlift.

I see this differential in my toddler as well.  Toddlers squat constantly, but it is all "mobility" work.  The squats are done for the purposes of movement, not for the purposes of lifting a weight.  If a toddler wants to lift a weight, they shift into a deadlift position.

It's probably been about a year since I've done weighted squats.  At this point, I have no desire to go back to them.  I am content training the deadlift as the main lift.  I know squats have been utilized in weight programs for decades, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily 100% healthy. 

Sometimes traditions need to change.  The combination of squat mobility and weighted deadlifts may be superior to doing both weighted squats and deadlifts.  This would be a good topic for a research study!

Dentist Update

I had a regular dentist appointment last week.  It had to be the fastest appointment I've had in years.  There were no cavities and the gums were fine.  I had the cleaning and inspection, and the whole thing was over in around a half hour.

Something I've changed in my oral health routine is providing solid benefits, though I'm not sure what.  I've made three changes in the last month:

• Started using Peelu toothpaste
• Started using EvoraPlus, which is an oral probiotic
• Started eating honey, which has been shown to reduce cavities

My hunch is that the toothpaste has had the biggest impact.  I feel that most modern toothpastes (which are really "chemical cocktails") probably upset the natural balance of bacteria in the mouth.  Removing these chemicals and replacing them with natural cleaners, like in Peelu, should be beneficial.

I will continue with the EvoraPlus until I run out, and then see if the Peelu toothpaste provides enough protection.

Running Insights, Part II

I ended up with one other running insight from the MovNat clinic.  Erwan talked about the proper running pattern being ball-heel-ball when running.  He describes things further in the comments section of this post.

I feel this pattern is correct, because it connects with some other things I've been reading.  In this paper(pdf), Michael Protzel, an Alexander Technique teacher, talks about where the balance point is in the feet.  He believes it is the talus bone, which is closer to the heel.  He shows that children instinctively balance on this point when they are in movement.

In other words, you can draw a straight line from the head to the shoulders to the hips and finally to the talus bone.

I think this is very important for running.  In POSE running, the weight is supposed to come down primarily on the balls of the feet.  However, the design of the foot is an arch, which means the greatest amount of stability is available when both points of the arch, the heel and the ball of the foot, are touching.

Therefore, I think the ball-heel-ball landing pattern makes the most sense.  It fits in with the arch design of the foot, and also can disperse impact forces the most.

Kinesiophobia

I've been reading a bit about kinesiophobia, or the fear of movement.  It connects to lower back pain, such that after one injures the lower back they are more protective in their movements.  This study confirms that people with low back pain have a more "guarded" posture while walking.

I think the implications of this are pretty important, but also pretty simple.  If you injure yourself and now your body is over-protective, then what's the best way to get the body to let down its guard?  I think the answer would be pain-free movement, and not movements or stretches that cause pain or discomfort.  MC has written about this lately.

Some physical therapists feel that working and stretching through the pain will help reestablish normal movement patterns.  I have my doubts about this.  It seems like all it would do is make the body more defensive.  Instead, it seems you would want to move in a pain-free way such that the body regains confidence.

This model could tie in some psychological factors as well.  Mental stress could easily make the body more defensive, which could work to increase back pain.  If a person reduces stress, then perhaps this could facilitate normal movement.  I certainly don't think that back pain is entirely due to psychological factors, but based on what I've been reading it could be a factor.

The Big Pushback

As many people would guess, the average age for a woman's first pregnancy is coming later in life.  With college and careers becoming more important to women, the average age for first-time mothers is now just over 25, while in 1970 it was just over 21.

So is this delayed motherhood good or bad?  I have to admit I am conflicted on this.  You can look at this in evolutionary terms, and see what was the age of first-time mothers in hunter-gatherer societies.  I seen a few pieces of research on this, and the average age seems to be around 19.  Therefore, you could say that this is the natural age for the first childbirth.

Having children at a younger age does have its benefits.  Fertility is higher, which makes conception easier.  The mother is physically younger, and therefore may have more stamina to take care of the child.  Also, women who have children at a younger age have a reduced risk of breast cancer.

However, there are potential costs to early motherhood as well.  A woman may have to interrupt her career or education.  The husband may have lower earnings at his younger age.  Younger parents may be more immature and may not take parenting as seriously.  In addition, couples marrying at a younger age may be more prone to divorce.

Overall, I find this pushback of motherhood disturbing.  If people are supposed to (in an evolutionary sense) have children at a younger age, then could disturbing this pattern cause unintended problems?  Another question is if people in their early 20s are not having children, then what are they doing?  In other words, this delay is creating a generation of "tweeners" - people who have reached their peak mating age but are not having children.  In evolutionary times, there were no tweeners.  People went right from peak mating age to parents. 

Maybe all this is nothing to worry about.  Still, I worry that this extended period of mating with no responsibility could lead to problems.  For example, research shows that married men and probably fathers are much less likely to engage in crime. 

Part of the problem is the way that society portrays children.  I can't stand these ridiculous tv shows that show screaming babies and frazzled parents.  You wonder what would happen if society promoted a more harmonious theme instead: having children is natural, children are valuable, and responsibility isn't all bad. 

Who knows, we might end up with younger, happier families! 

The Parenting Mind

One of my all-time favorite books is "The Mating Mind" by Geoffrey Miller.  It shows how humans evolved to compete in the mating game through various means.  I've always hoped that he would write a sequel, let's call it "The Parenting MInd", but I don't think that's going to happen.

What I would like to see explored is how humans have evolved to become parents.  Surprisingly, I don't see a ton of research on this subject.  You see research on mating, but you don't see a lot of research on the result of mating: parenting.

Being a parent myself, I can say without a doubt that the ability to parent is an evolved characteristic - in other words, it's built in.  The ability may be stronger in some than others, but I would say that the basic pattern is there in all, especially given a normal environment.

This leads to other related questions: if people have evolved to be parents, does this imply that not having children is then not natural (and perhaps not healthy)?  This is just a further application of the Paleo concept: you can eat a Paleo diet, exercise in a Paleo way, and live a Paleo lifestyle.  But having children is really the ultimate Paleo characteristic.  Paleolithic people that didn't have children obviously did not get their genes passed on.

I suppose this isn't talked about because it is a sensitive issue.  Nowadays with birth control, having children is a choice.  In Paleolithic times, it was just the natural result of sexual activity.

Has any research been done to compare the health of parents versus non-parents?  I think this would be interesting.  I've seen some surveys that asked happiness levels of parents and non-parents, but I don't put a lot of stock in these types of instruments.  I might look into this issue if I get the time.

Merry Christmas 2009!

  
Merry Christmas to everyone!

Running Insights

One benefit from the MovNat clinic was an insight on running.  When we went for a group run, we noticed that Erwan's heels came up high in the back, even when running at a slow pace.  Someone then asked him about it.  I have written about this idea of a high heel kick earlier this year.

He responded that he picked up the habit from trail running.  In trail running, you need a little more time or room for proper foot placement.  In other words, to avoid stepping on sharp objects, it's good to have a little more distance between the foot and then the eventual foot placement.  In fact, another seminar participant said they learned this the hard way.  He used Vibrams on trails but ended up breaking toes when he kicked a rock because his feet were too low.

In an evolutionary sense, you could then say that this high heel kick is part of the "natural" way to run.  Our ancestors ran barefoot on trails, and therefore they would have developed this high kick as a way to avoid injury.  It is only in the modern environment of padded shoes and smooth surfaces that a person can get away with a low foot swing.

Plus, the low heel kick just looks wrong.  Erwan made a point that when a technique looks graceful it's because a person is using efficient technique.  Whenever I see a jogger in the neighborhood with a low kick, it never looks pretty.  It looks like they are shuffling along and not running.  Good runners, even at a slow pace, seem to have that high heel kick.

  
(Photo courtesy of Flickr) 

MovNat Seminar Review

I just got back from a one-day MovNat seminar in Toronto.  Given what I had read on the web, I thought it was worth a shot.  Overall, I have mixed feelings on how it went.

The best part of the seminar was the first couple hours.  Erwan explained how natural movement is what we are designed for.  The talk made sense and resonated with me.  Just as with diet, the best bet is to mimic the patterns of our hunter-gatherer ancestors.

Over the course of a day, we went through the main movement capacities.  Lunch was short and everything kept moving.  The seminar ran long and there were still things that Erwan wanted to cover, but we ran out of time.

However, the seminar could be improved in a number of ways.  First, there was no written material that was given out.  Participants are left with only their memory, and there was a lot of information.  Even a 5 page handout with some bullet points would have been nice.

Second, there was too much one-way communication.  Erwan never had us introduce ourselves or asked much about our training backgrounds.  It was mostly just Erwan talking for 8 hours straight.  That gets old, no matter who is doing the talking.  If the seminar was more interactive, it would be better.

Third, there was not as much individual attention as I would have liked.  For example, after Erwan explained running technique, we ran as a group.  Then he made a few general comments and we all ran again.  Why not have each person run individually?  It would have taken the same amount of time, and I think the participants would have benefited more. 

Probably the biggest thing I got from this was an insight on mobility.  I think that in the modern world, most people (myself included) do not have full joint mobility especially in the lower body.  Without this mobility, you don't really have a base for natural movement.  So while natural movement is optimal, most people probably need to improve their basic joint mobility first, and then progress to natural movement.

I thought that the information that was presented was valid.  Ideally, this is something that should be taught in phys ed classes in the schools.  It's probably much easier to learn correct movement patterns when you're younger.  If everyone learned this stuff as children, then you would probably have many more active adults.

Overall, I thought this seminar was good, but not great.  For the money and time I spent, I was somewhat disappointed.  The good news is that once you possess the main principles, you really don't need any more coaching.  As Erwan himself said, no one owns natural movement.  I plan on pursuing joint mobility for a while, and then focus more on natural movement. 

Valuing Children

I can't speak for how things were in the past, but it seems that today children are becoming less valued in general.  This is not to say that society isn't devoting resources to children.  It's that children aren't being valued as unique individuals.

I feel that society is giving children what society wants rather than what children need.  For example, I feel that these new layers of testing in the schools (No Child Left Behind) are a step in the wrong direction.  It almost seems that the goal is to make all children the same, even though that's obviosuly impossible.

The best type of education would allow a child to follow their own path.  Instead, it seems like schools are trying to put everyone on the same path.  Why can't a child be a great math student and a poor history student?  If he or she really loves math and not history, then what's the point in continually drilling them on history?  Once the test is complete, the so-called knowledge disappears and the student's original interests remain.

I think the homeschooling movement is a great trend.  In a biological sense, parents are the original educators.  When the homeschooling movement started, I remember people thinking it was only for religious nuts or hippies.  Then homeschoolers started turning up and beating the public school kids in various competitions.  Finally, people started to catch on: maybe you don't really need a school to educate children.

The other thing that bugs me about all this is that there is no connection to evolution.  Genetic evolution is all about variation.  Each person has a different package of traits.  These differences facilitate the process of sexual selection.  If everyone was equal or the same, there are no differences to be selected upon.  Each child should be encouraged to maximize their unique traits - not minimize them.  

I hope the future brings more unconventional schools to the world of education.  There are already enough standards and categories for children.  Let children develop and unfold as the unique beings that they are.